Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sunak must be using GBNOTnews financial planners .. GB News losses up 38% to £42.4m giving channel total deficit of £76m since launch Losses in the latest accounting period were six times greater than revenue.   Mind you, as it seems to clearly be a disinformation service and route of money to poopy MPs and hangers on ... I'm sure they dont mind (mm is that the 'Tory guv or GBNews I'm talking about?.)   GB News owner pumps in further £41mn in funding as losses widen WWW.FT.COM Vehicle backed by hedge fund tycoon Paul Marshall steps in as right-leaning broadcaster increases number of staff   GB News losses grew 38% to £42.4m in 2023 financial year - Press Gazette PRESSGAZETTE.CO.UK GB News' operating losses grew 38% to £42.4m in the year to May 2023, the business has reported in its latest Companies House...  
    • United Kingdom Debt Clock: British National Debt Grow By The Second - Commodity.com COMMODITY.COM Want to know why the UK's national debt-to-GDP ratio is increasing so rapidly? See our overview of the UK national debt and GDP figures.   The tories borrowing last year alone was " £1,780 per head of the UK’s population"
    • Hi Schipoo and thank you for the update.   Excellent news for you and a huge relief, I imagine. You might like to start a new thread about Independent Tax if you want advice on that problem. HB
    • Hi everyone, I have an update on my case that I’d like to share with you all.  so after submitting 371 pages in my bundle, a witness statement and skeleton argument for my court case due to take place in Manchester on June 21st I got an email from my litigator stating that hmrc have pulled out and the case is now closed!    this is the body of the letter….. This letter, which is copied to the Appellant, pursuant to Rule 17 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, the Respondents gives notice to the Tribunal of their intention to not defend the above appeal.   The Respondents respectfully invite the Tribunal to allow the appeal and close its file. In lieu of the above the Respondents would respectfully ask the Tribunal to vacate the hearing scheduled for Friday 21 June 2024. We would accordingly invite the Tribunal to close its file. Obviously this is extremely good news which hasn’t sunk in that after 3 years of fighting it is over.    I do have a further fight on my hands in that the Group Action I had joined with Independent Tax that had been disbanded in November last year and I chose not to continue with them. They are trying to bill me over 5k for the work they did under that Group Action which is ludicrous bearing in mind the whole point in joining was that it would keep the cost to a minimum as it would be shared between us all. They had asked if I wanted to continue to have them represent me on an individual level which I declined, if I hadn’t, goodness knows what they would have been trying to charge me now. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Debt Too Old Or Can I Get Served A Statutory Demand?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5528 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I am new here and found the group by searching the net for info on Statutory Demands.

 

I have been contacted on numerous occasions by a company called "capquest". They say that I owe them £12,700 from a debt I owed egg banking. The debt was over 8 years ago and on my credit file it show's as "setled".

 

The company are now threatening me with a "statutory Demand" for the debt. I thought the debt was too old to recover so can the company do this? Does anyone think they are serious? Can anyone give me any advice?

 

They haven't actually served me yet but is there an actual time limit on debt?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have not acknowledged the debt in writing or made any payments in the last 6 year, then the debt is Statute Barred, ie unenforceable. That doesn't prevent them asking you to settle the debt, it just means that you can say 'It's statute barred, ***k off'

 

The same applies to a statutory demand, but if they do issue one (and it costs them nothing to do so), you must apply to have it set aside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them this;

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Acc/Ref No

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

I wish to point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I should also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period”.

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that “continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970”.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Print Name do not sign

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear all,

 

Fantastic advice many thanks. In this climate, and the prospect of losing my job, I may be needing more advice from the site.

 

It's great to see dedicated people willing to help others.

 

Keep it up...

Link to post
Share on other sites

dive be cautioned you MUST only communicate in writing & head every letter with the term "None prejudicial as to liability" Furthermore try not to even mention the alleged debt refer to "the subject of your last communication dated" etc You'll be amazed at the lengths some will go in an attempt to claim you have acknowledged the debt

Link to post
Share on other sites

dive be cautioned you MUST only communicate in writing & head every letter with the term "None prejudicial as to liability" Furthermore try not to even mention the alleged debt refer to "the subject of your last communication dated" etc You'll be amazed at the lengths some will go in an attempt to claim you have acknowledged the debt

 

Hi, thanks for the advice. I will do as you say. Wouls you advise on adjusting the above letter template to take out the reference of the last payment?

 

Thanks in advance...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...